Comments on: Ticker Ticking or Tocking?

By: Lefty Elitist

Lefty Elitist — Wed, 02 Nov 2005 04:51:15 +0000

Interesting report Mark. The thing about arguing against arbitrary exectuovee power is that its *never very long* till circumstances bear out your case.

The absence of adequate judicial review is utter foolishness.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 02 Nov 2005 03:53:13 +0000

Ron, see this comment and subsquent ones on the other thread. Might be better to centralise discussion there.

By: Ron

Ron — Wed, 02 Nov 2005 03:45:44 +0000

Had a couple of thoughts about the new terrorist threat;

they found out about it WITHOUT the new laws

and

why hasn’t the govt terrorist threat level been increased?

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 02 Nov 2005 03:33:07 +0000

And interestingly, a day after ASIO settled out of court for wrongly raiding the home of a Sydney man and his family. Perhaps C.L. would think, given his Victorian police thing, that federal agents with drawn weapons refusing to allow the man’s wife to dress in modest clothing is showing appropriate cultural insensitivity.

And, of course, the media couldn’t have reported on this case if the proposed laws had been in force, according to the couple’s lawyer.

So, many more such incidents, no public scrutiny? Collateral damage in the clash of civilisations, C.L.?

By: Ron

Ron — Wed, 02 Nov 2005 03:25:07 +0000

‘Specific’ terror threat against Australia: PM

Don’t these things happen in perfect harmony with Howard’s announcements and laws?

And Beazley is right there as Howard’s right-hand man for the right-wing ALP:

“Opposition Leader Kim Beazley, who was extensively briefed on the threat last night and again this morning, said Labor was prepared to pass the amendment tonight if necessary.”

Reminds me of the story of the little boy who cried wolf; one day Howard will tell the truth about something and no one will believe him because of his history of past lies.

By: Bill Posters

Bill Posters — Wed, 02 Nov 2005 00:09:22 +0000

typical of the man��s poor judgement.

Or, alternatively, Beazley really is comfortable with the laws, and is simply revealing himself to be the Tory he always was.

By: Keith

Keith — Tue, 01 Nov 2005 11:43:05 +0000

I’m amazed by Beazley’s inept effort over the terror laws. He may well be in a tough position, but supporting the Government and trying to out-right Howard on this issue is typical of the man’s poor judgement. It’s like the whole border protection fiasco all over again.

When it turns out that these laws are draconian, and do trample all over everyone’s rights, Labor won’t be able to say anything. The state premiers have already made their bed by agreeing in principle to these laws sight unseen, which hasn’t helped. Now, Beazley is running around with this ‘Please protect human rights, but we’ll support the laws regardless. Oh and make them tougher while you’re at it’ mess of a position. All because of the need to be seen to be ‘Tough on Terror’. These laws won’t help one bit.

By: Kim

Kim — Tue, 01 Nov 2005 04:44:58 +0000

Maybe, if Latho’s right, the Beazer has a fallback position as British defence minister lined up? Did he ever deny those rumours about a Commons seat?

By: Lefty Elitist

Lefty Elitist — Tue, 01 Nov 2005 00:17:17 +0000

yes steve, but does beazley?

By: liam hogan

liam hogan — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 23:38:36 +0000

What Steve Edwards said.
[washes keyboard out with soap]

By: Homer Paxton

Homer Paxton — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 20:50:57 +0000

Ron,
rodney Croome represents more of a minority voice than ACL!

By: Ron

Ron — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 19:50:49 +0000

Another example of Beazley trying to out-right the Right:

Speech to the Australian Christian Lobby 29/10/05

“That organisation has a history of opposing important social reform no matter how moderate (de facto equality for same-sex couples and regulation of the sex industry), of platforming anti-gay hate (it was the ACL which organised last year’s virulently anti-gay marriage forum in Canberra), and of ignoring the boundaries necessary for a secular, multi-faith society to thrive.

The ACL’s logo of a crucifix ascendant over Parliament House should be enough to warn anyone who believes in democratic pluralism that the ACL doesn’t.” (Rodney Croome)

As I said above, I am sure Beazley would be happier on the Liberal benches these days.

By: Steve Edwards

Steve Edwards — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 16:59:43 +0000

I think there are some people around here who should read mumble.com.au a little more often. The knee-jerk anti-Beazleyism (and by implication, blind pro-Gillardism) is getting too much. Do you people actually want to win?

By: observa

observa — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 16:02:42 +0000

Lefty, they’re probably quite happy dealing with Howard. Bit hard to blame a Federal ALP govt when you don’t get what you want. IMO, privatisation has largely been about dumping the problems of the big PS unions onto private enterprise. The bus privatisations in Adelaide were typical. When one contractor was beaten at renewal tender by the others recently and its workers were made redundant, but some were offered work with the winning tenderer, Rann just shrugged his shoulders. In the bad old days he’d be stuck with them for life. This way private enterprise gets its hands dirty at rearranging the workforce and Rann is not the bad guy with his union mates. The Premiers went overboard with toll roads and tunnels it seems, by privatising natural monopolies. There’s no way you’d argue Qantas and the Comm Bank should be in govt hands these days. Same with Telstra soon. These are not natural monopolies anymore. Virgin, Jetstar, Optus and Vodaphone have seen to that.

Kim, we can compete with India on wages and have done for years. That’s because the capital we work with is far superior and hence so is our productivity generally. That is not true with labour intensive products, but who wants to sew shirts together in Oz, or man outgoing call centres these days?

By: Kim

Kim — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:59:06 +0000

We can��t stick our heads up our bums and hope the world will owe us a living.

Shorter observa: The Blue Sky mining company ain’t gonna save us (nor will competing with India on wages)…

By: Lefty Elitist

Lefty Elitist — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:55:57 +0000

Actually Observa, the state labour premiers have been doing a very neat line in the privatisation two-step for years now. Thing is, Joe Public dosnt actually like it, want it, or trust it. State ALPs gets the vote every time on public services by appearing to be the side least likely to privatise (further). Even if its not especially true. The Coalition just has nothing to offer at state level, where its all about managing health and schools (never their strong suits in public opinion).

Oh, and aside from appearing to reject some of the failed offerings of the economic reform agenda, the other force keeping them safe and sound, all 8 at once, is John Howard’s incumbency. With the possible exception of QLD (where things are different, as the nats are also able to play anti-privatisation footsies), I predict no coaltion state governments until the ALP wins federally.

By: observa

observa — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:42:53 +0000

“Ive been pleasantly surprised by the Premiers over the last few days. See, they actually win elections, often crushing their (admittedly miserable) opponents worse than Howard has ever managed.”
And how did they manage to do that Lefty? By giving the punters what they bloody well want within balanced budgetary constraints as well as responding to economic realities with world’s best practice. Remember when Federal Labor floated the dollar, deregulated finance, and began opening up Oz to world’s best/(eg Button car plans, etc) Howard has continued that on with waterfront reform, reform of the ubiquitous WST with the GST and now more IR reform. How are we doing? Zero govt debt, low inflation and the best employment in 30 years and yet we can’t stand still
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17094189-29277,00.html Nor will we. We can’t stick our heads up our bums and hope the world will owe us a living. This country can now kick arse with the best, because it shrugged off insular inward looking policies and nosewiping every runny nose that comes along. When Federal Labor recognises that, as well as getting border security and Muslim terrorism right, it will be fit for govt again. You’ve gotta break some eggs to make a decent omelette and Howard knows that implicitly. At the moment Federal Labor wants to be nice to every lost cause and squawky loser that blips across its radar screen. Perhaps it’s easier for them at State level. Here’s the money you’ve got to play with, now go figure how to divvy it out. Perhaps that’s what leftists are best at, because then they are forced to understand tradeoffs and work within them.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:22:41 +0000

Gillard! Rudd for Rudder!

No… oh well.

By: liam hogan

liam hogan — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:04:54 +0000

He’ll be the leader come election time, though, izquierdista. It’s pain for you as much as for the rest of us.

By: Lefty Elitist

Lefty Elitist — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 12:04:29 +0000

Well, for my 2c worth: I woldnt claim he’s unpopular. My problem with Beazley is that he’s Mr. 48%. A sure bet to minimise loss, but not enough grunt to win.

Perfect for a party which has seeks to be a mechanism for the distribution of opposition bench seats.

An alternative government might want someone else.